An Analysis of Print and Online Media's Representation of Prostate Cancer in Public Figures.

Abstract

Print and online media play a crucial role in shaping public understanding of diseases like prostate cancer (PCa), particularly through reporting on public figures. However, such media coverage can introduce bias by providing incomplete or non-evidence-based information. This study aimed to assess potential bias by applying a standardized rubric to articles discussing PCa in public figures. Articles were sourced from LexisNexis® using the terms "prostate cancer" and the name of a public figure diagnosed with the disease. The study analyzed 147 articles covering 49 public figures, selected based on relevance from top-circulation publications between 1994 and 2024. Of these, 95.9% had unbiased titles, 35.4% included expert quotes, and 27.2% mentioned risk factors such as age, race, and family history. However, 25.9% of the articles exhibited bias supporting PCa screening, and only 16.3% referenced scientific studies. Additionally, among the 45 articles published when shared decision-making (SDM) was the standard of care for screening decisions, only one referenced this concept. Thus, while titles were generally unbiased, statements supporting screening, low rates of scientific referencing, and minimal reference to SDM highlight limitations of this reporting that may bias readers' understanding of prostate cancer detection and treatment. These findings may provide a window into how reporting on medical conditions in public figures, which can influence readers' perceptions of disease, can improve in quality and completeness.